what I would do if I was commish of... Baseball

[OnWis97]

Starting off with Baseball, as the series is coming to a close

Here are some changes I would make

1. Weekend world series games played during the day.

2. End inter league play.

3. End wildcards. (Best division winner gets bye through to LCS, 2 other division winners have 5 game series to play them)

4. Try to find someway of having the season finished by 20th October. That might involve more double headers, a shorter schedule etc. (Its the Fall classic after all)

1. Agree. If people plan 16 Sundays around their 9-7 football team, they can plan a couple of days around their World Series team. And MLB should not let the fall classic take a backseat to NFL week 8. I would add some consideration to who is in the series for weeknights. With two east coast teams, start at 7:00 eastern.

2. Disagree. I like that the other teams can make an occasional appearance to my park. I agree with BBVT that the rotation needs to be more NFL-like, though. That was how I thought it was supposed to be before the first 5 years of Central vs. Central. As a sports fan (and not a business person, which is what matters), I'd like the division rotation, then each team comes to my park every six years. Still keeps the leagues fairly separate while adding some variety. Everyone mocks the "Pirates vs. Royals" game, but big deal. Intraleague play gives us "Pirates vs. Nats." I firmly believe that interleague play would be done if not for the big ticket sales in about 5 of the "rivalry series". And those are what take away from the "specialness" Yanks and Mets 6 games a year gets to be old hat. Every three years would be fun. Plus it messes with the integrity--Twins get the Brewers and Sox get the cubs (some years favors sox, but more often favors Twins).

3. Need an even number of playoff teams in each league. The "bye" team would probably be at a disadvantage.

4. Again, as a fan, I agree. But the money dictates that it will never happen. Not even for day/night DHs (because it would probably dilute the attendance somewhat).

As for what I'd do, I like some of the ideas above. The key ones:

1. Salary cap. I'll take the NFL's socialism over MLB's capitalism any day. It's more of a sport when the teams have close to equal opportunities to employ good players. We like to watch the Yankees (to root either for or against), but the bottom line is, they need someone to play. The teams are not coke, pepsi and RC. They are closer to coke, diet coke, sprite, etc. They are different products, but they are also, to an extent, in it together.

2. Get rid of DH. I agree that the strategy is FAR more interesting then "more offense." But as pointed out, it's never going to happen due to the union (see E. Martinez, D. Winfield, P. Molitor, etc.). In fact, I'd guess the NL will have the DH eventually.

3. Start the season earlier and let NY, Min, Chi, Det, etc wait to play at home. If the weather is going to divert far from normal, better at the beginning than during the post season.

4. Dump the all-star game for home field. But keep the game. I happen to love it, but as an exhibition. KEEP the rule that every team is represented (As a 1990s Twins fan, the biggest thing to look forward to was what our rep would do). And make a "12 inning rule." The knee jerk reaction to the Milwaukee game was the opposite of my reaction. I think if the rule was that "if this exhibition is tied after 12, it remains a tie", people would have accepted it (assuming it was still tied after 1 more). This still gives us three extra innings of a game whose winner does not matter and solves the problem of having to worry about how to manage the pitchers and making some team's closer go 5 innings.

5. So how to choose home field? I'd just go back to alternating. You could do best record (even though that is fairly meaningless). Or even NL vs. AL in interleague. The latter would cause cries of "Royals/Pirates should not impact it." But it still beats the All Star game.

[BaltimoreFan]

1. Eliminate the DH. It was a gimmick designed to increase attendance in the 70's. Sorry, but I've always thought it was far more exciting to see the pitcher hit the occasional RBI single than it is to see some fat guy that can't field get 4 ABs a game. The DH eliminates strategy and makes it too easy to set up a bullpen for the late innings. There is more to baseball than offense.

2. All World Series and night playoff games start at 7pm. If Fox is really that worried about ratings then they would know that you are far more likely to keep viewers who began watching at 7 and don't have to stay up until 1 am to see the end of the game.

3. Every team plays one Sunday doubleheader per month. That may be enough to keep the season from carrying over into November and it adds more off days for the players to the schedule.

4. All teams will open the first week of the season in warm weather sites or in stadiums with roofs. I don't know if it was planned or just a scheduling quirk but in the mid 80's this happened and there was not a single rainout until sometime in July.

5. Home field advantage in The World Series will revert back to alternating years. That is the only fair way to do it.

6. Eliminate the all-star game and use the extra three days to shorten the season. Interleague play allows fans in all markets to see all teams. That is good for the sport. The all-star game used to be great. It isn't any more. With the advent of interleague play, games on cable and satellite TV, and wall to wall coverage of baseball, the all-star game has simply outlived it's usefulness.

7. At least once during every home stand the teams will participate in a 30 minute autograph session for the young fans. Anyone over 18 need not apply.

8. Umpires will be told to enforce the rules and call a ball if a pitcher is taking too long between pitches. Batters will be allowed to step out of the box one time per AB. A strike will be called if they do it more than once.

9. There will be revenue sharing, a salary cap and a salary minimum for lack of a better term. Not only will big market teams have to operate under the same rules as everyone else, there will be a salary floor in which all small market teams will have to spend a certain amount. It's just bad for baseball when we already know that teams like The Royals and Pirates are basically playing 162 exhibition games.

10. The playoffs will be seeded based on records.

That's all I got for now.

I like some of the points, like the DH being eliminated. I'd also like to see home field advantage in the World Series changed, but given to the team with the best record. The autograph idea is cool too, but seems more like a team promotion, more than a league wide one.

Many of the rest don't seem reasonable economically. For the World Series/Playoff start time, I don't think MLB has much of a say. They are basically selling their TV rights to the highest bidder. Unless, they want to accept less money, they have to give into Fox's demands. I've also wondered if the start times had to do with the west coast. WIth an 8:00 start time on the east coast, it is 5:00 in the west. That seems a lot better than 4:00 (still work hours) if the start time is moved up an hour.

Also I've stated many times here and elsewhere, a salary cap (with a floor) is NEVER going to happen. The MLBPA is one of the strongest unions in the country and they would never allow for a salary cap. The current owners (and surely the commissioner since he was an owner) would love to have a salary cap, it saves them money. The players are the ones that lose out. Unfortunately your going to have to find a better way to increase parity, if you want to do so in MLB.

I also don't see the All-Star game being eliminated due to the loss in revenue. Which I don't mind, since I enjoy it, even if it should be a useless exhibition.

There is no reason that in a league of 30 teams, only four should make the playoffs. In fact, I'd like to see a second wild card team get in and have the two teams play a three game series for the right to go to the divisional series, but I don't think that would jive with the whole "shortening the schedule" kick.

Actually 8 teams make the playoffs. Adding a second wild card team would push the number up to 10, which is a third of the league. Anymore would be way too many. I've liked the idea of a 2nd wildcard, but would perfer it be just a one game playoff. A three game series would have the better teams sitting and give them an unfair disadvantage IMO.

Otherwise I agree with you, none of those 3 things are going away. One thing I'd like to see is for the leagues to be even at 15 teams a piece. Then spread interleague play across the season (instead of getting it done all at once). That way each division and league is even and the team's schedules are close to being the same.

[Saintsfan]

I am conflicted on the designated hitter. I like that its a quirky thing between the leagues, but I also think its a bit of a strange silly American fake thing. I don't think I'd spend terribly long mourning it if it went.

Another alternative for the playoffs, given that on balance the bye for the best record is probably not a positive thing is go back to straight Leagues, no divisions, and have a 16 team playoff, similar to basketball and hockey, but have 3 or 5 game series in the first 2 round with the team with the best record having home advantage throughout the series. Obviously as this would be a longer playoff scenario, the season would have to be quite severly curtailed. 130 or 140ish games?? Playoffs through september and october. Obviously this would be unlikely to ever happen, but you could reignite the old pennant race tradition, as well as having teams competing hard for there playoff rank, as well as place.

[The_Admiral]

Another alternative for the playoffs, given that on balance the bye for the best record is probably not a positive thing is go back to straight Leagues, no divisions, and have a 16 team playoff, similar to basketball and hockey, but have 3 or 5 game series in the first 2 round with the team with the best record having home advantage throughout the series.

I will not have an eighth place team beating a first place team two out of three. That's unacceptable. There are a lot of bad sports thoughts in this thread.

EDIT: THat's not fair, infrared was generally on point with everything except the salary cap

[Saintsfan]

Another alternative for the playoffs, given that on balance the bye for the best record is probably not a positive thing is go back to straight Leagues, no divisions, and have a 16 team playoff, similar to basketball and hockey, but have 3 or 5 game series in the first 2 round with the team with the best record having home advantage throughout the series.

I will not have an eighth place team beating a first place team two out of three. That's unacceptable. There are a lot of bad sports thoughts in this thread.

EDIT: THat's not fair, infrared was generally on point with everything except the salary cap

Then the top seeded team better not blow the big home advantage that they have. I think having home advantage throughout a series would be a huge advantage for the top seeded teams. I would suggest a 5 game series would be better as well.

I am not saying my suggestion would ever be taken seriously, but I think its an interesting concept, and would mean that a lot more of the regular season games might be more relevant.

[Epiphanic]

I'm not going to be saying anything original, but I want to share the following opinions.

DH - I don't hate the Designated Hitter and I think that's a function of me being born well after the DH was instituted. Imagining the American League without the DH is a little weird. I do prefer the NL-style rules though. There is more opportunity for strategy and it is fun to see pitchers get hits. On the whole, I'm satisfied with the AL having the DH and the NL not having it. If both leagues must play with one or the other, I would prefer the NL rules prevailing.

Interleague Play - If I was Commissioner, I would get rid of it. I think it ruins some of the "mystique" of the World Series. Despite my preference not to have it, it is a big money maker so it probably needs to stay. If it must stay, it really makes the most sense to me to have 15 teams in each league. Yes, that requires an interleague series at all times, but why is that a big deal? Also, why not just play everyone for at least one series every year? Interleague play has essentially made the two leagues "conferences", might as well go all the way. This also provides the opportunity for more balanced schedule strengths for teams vying for the Wild Card spot.

Wild Card - Love it, and I think 4 teams per league is perfect. Here's something crazy that I think is fun (at least in my head). Perferably, I'd nix interleague play, but with 14 in the AL nad 16 in the NL, American League teams have an less competition for a playoff spot. The simplest soltuion? Expand to an even 32 teams and have 16 teams in both leagues. At this point, I think everyone assumes an NFL-style divisional system which eliminates the Wild Card unless you expand the playoff field. I would take a different approach. Go to two 8-team divisions. Two division winners with two wild cards.

[BB61]

There is no reason that in a league of 30 teams, only four should make the playoffs. In fact, I'd like to see a second wild card team get in and have the two teams play a three game series for the right to go to the divisional series, but I don't think that would jive with the whole "shortening the schedule" kick.

Actually 8 teams make the playoffs. Adding a second wild card team would push the number up to 10, which is a third of the league. Anymore would be way too many. I've liked the idea of a 2nd wildcard, but would perfer it be just a one game playoff. A three game series would have the better teams sitting and give them an unfair disadvantage IMO.

I was referring to the playoffs pre-wild card, but I didn't state that fact, so... my bad.

I'm okay with a one game playoff to determine the wild card winner, especially when you have what you had a couple of years ago when the Phillies had a better record than the Cardinals (who won the division) and missed the playoffs.

[Jigga]

How would y'all handle the draft and the signing of international free-agent prospects? These two issues are huge in terms of competitive balance.

There are two huge issues regarding the MLB Draft: signability and the ability to trade picks. The worst teams can't take the best players in the draft. Instead, they have to settle for lesser players that they won't have to pay as much or can control longer. Teams at the top of the draft are taking fliers on decent players that are not generally rated anywhere near that slot, losing out on the value of having such high picks in the first place. Plus, these lesser teams don't have a chance to even realize the value of their draft position by trading their pick to another team for "other assets." So, would you would-be commissioners formally adopt (since it's a fantasy anyway, we'll forgo the collective bargaining issues) a straight slotting system for draftees like the NBA, a rookie pool system like the NFL, something else, or just leave it alone for now...or until the next Stephen Strasburg succeeds in completely blowing up the structure.

Then you look at the issue of signing international free-agents. Of course, this is soon going to get huge attention because of the signing of Aroldis Chapman, the Cuban (now Andorran) Stephen Strasburg, by the Yankees, Red Sox, or Mets (maybe not now though...lol), who can outspend everybody on any player they really want, with no limits whatsoever. Should they be subject to a draft (for international players only)?

[njmeadowlanders]

When it comes to a salary cap coupled with a salary floor however, the players union AS A WHOLE would (potentially depending on who's argument you believe) see more in player salaries. Of course, this would trim down the A-Rod type salaries but it would force teams to spend more and the lesser players would benefit more, and smaller-market teams may be able to perform better.

[The_Admiral]

Have you guys read Baseball Prospectus's Baseball Between the Numbers, by chance? They talk about whether baseball would benefit from a payroll cap/floor system, and after crunching the numbers, determine that it would not. I'm not going to regurgitate the entire essay, since it should be available in bookstores/libraries/Internet, but the best point made is that a salary floor ends up being counterproductive. Compare baseball to the NBA: whereas what you see is basically what you get with an NBA roster, baseball organizations also include farm systems, overseas academies, extensive scouting networks, and more. There are so many more ways to allocate your personnel resources than just the 25-man roster, and in the cases of the small-market teams that a salary floor is supposed to assist, it hinders more than it helps. Let's say you're some small-market team, and you have 11 million dollars. Is it smarter to invest that 11 million in drafting/scouting/development, which will pay long-term dividends for the organization, or should you throw it at some average free agent just to reach a salary floor? While their actions weren't the function of an enforced payroll floor, the (Devil) Rays make for a great case study in effective small-market spending. They lobbed money at big names to no avail, and only when they put their money into the fundamentals of top-to-bottom team-building did they win the pennant.

The simplest soltuion? Expand to an even 32 teams and have 16 teams in both leagues. At this point, I think everyone assumes an NFL-style divisional system which eliminates the Wild Card unless you expand the playoff field. I would take a different approach. Go to two 8-team divisions. Two division winners with two wild cards.

While I'm just wild about two eight-team divisions with either four or eight (preferably four) playoff teams, there's nothing simple about finding places to put two more major league teams and their various affiliates down the line. We're probably overexpanded as it is, unless Havana somehow becomes a viable major league town in the next fifteen years. It's not as simple as adding two teams simply to reach an even 32. The NHL added numerous teams simply to fill dates on arenas' calendars, and now those teams are existing on toothpick stilts.

[Epiphanic]

The simplest soltuion? Expand to an even 32 teams and have 16 teams in both leagues. At this point, I think everyone assumes an NFL-style divisional system which eliminates the Wild Card unless you expand the playoff field. I would take a different approach. Go to two 8-team divisions. Two division winners with two wild cards.

While I'm just wild about two eight-team divisions with either four or eight (preferably four) playoff teams, there's nothing simple about finding places to put two more major league teams and their various affiliates down the line. We're probably overexpanded as it is, unless Havana somehow becomes a viable major league town in the next fifteen years. It's not as simple as adding two teams simply to reach an even 32. The NHL added numerous teams simply to fill dates on arenas' calendars, and now those teams are existing on toothpick stilts.

Yeah...the devil is in the details, but it's still fun to think about.

[Saintsfan]

Jigga raises an interesting point about international players. Its a bit tough to work through really. Would you have a seperate draft for international players? If not how do you differentiate between prospects and international players, because signing a raw college player and signing a gnarly old 10 year veteran of the Japanese leagues isn't the same thing? But then if you have a seperate draft are you almost insisting teams sign overseas players??

My own view is that the way its dealt with at the moment is as good as you are going to get.

[BaltimoreFan]

How would y'all handle the draft and the signing of international free-agent prospects? These two issues are huge in terms of competitive balance.

These are great points, and I'm surprised I forgot about them earlier since I recently came up with my own (maybe not realistic) solutions.

For the draft, I'd like to see players actually register for it. Like prospects in the NFL and NBA. Then penalize players who don't sign with the team they are drafted too (like not letting them reenter for a couple of years). That along with a slotting system would take away the prospect's leverage.

For international free-agents, I'd like to see one or more Caribbean leagues formed which would essentially be the international equivalent to high school or college. Those players are then eligible to enter the draft. This would give all teams an equal opportunity to obtain international prospects. It would also attach meaningful statistics to the prospects and maybe make it easier to project them. I'm not sure if this is realistic though because so many teams have so much money and academies set in place. A lot of owners would be quite unhappy.

[HedleyLamarr]

This is impossible. If you balance the leagues, you'd have to have at least one interleague series being played at all times. If your interleague series are only two games, then it would be impossible to build a schedule with this alignment. Even if you went to three game series, you'd have some teams playing more than one series against other teams, since there has to be one IL series every day throughout the entire season.

I don't have any problem with this, really. Does a Mets-Yankees game have more statistical importance in September than it does in April or June?

[NJTank]

I think with the NFL you could not play a day game on Sunday, but I would like to see Saturday World Series games start at 3:30

[Saintsfan]

I think with the NFL you could not play a day game on Sunday, but I would like to see Saturday World Series games start at 3:30

My view is :censored: it its the World Series. Get a media partner who will make a deal out of the series ahead of football for that one or two days, and get on with it. One of Baseball's biggest problems in a way, it seems to me, is getting into a foetal position every time football is mentioned.

[BBTV]

This is impossible. If you balance the leagues, you'd have to have at least one interleague series being played at all times. If your interleague series are only two games, then it would be impossible to build a schedule with this alignment. Even if you went to three game series, you'd have some teams playing more than one series against other teams, since there has to be one IL series every day throughout the entire season.

I don't have any problem with this, really. Does a Mets-Yankees game have more statistical importance in September than it does in April or June?

Of course not. I'm just saying that under his plan of having the interleague series be only 2 games, it is not only difficult, but actually impossible to build a schedule to accomodate this with balanced leagues.

I do kind of like having the interleague series start in either May / June / July, but it's not mandatory. They could do the "rivalry" series in July in place of the All Star break though.

[BaltimoreFan]

One of Baseball's biggest problems in a way, it seems to me, is getting into a foetal position every time football is mentioned.

I don't think its baseball, its the networks. Baseball is trying to maximize the contract and to do so they have to make it appealing for the networks bidding. Think about the negotiations.

Fox says "we'll give you $1.5 billion dollars for the rights to broadcast the World Series IF the games start at 8:00 ET and the series starts during the week".

MLB says "well, we'd perfer to have a couple day games and also don't want to extend the season into November, so you'll have to broadcast more games during the weekend."

Fox says "Ok, but we'll only give you $500 million for that deal"

Do you really think MLB is going to turn down that extra billion just to appease the fans? The same fans that are tuning in anyway?

*NOTE*- I have no idea how accurate those figures are, but you get the idea. MLB would lose significant money if they demand that the networks compete with football.

[whchoclte]

FIRST thing I would do is:

Ability to trade Draft picks (this is a must if smaller teams will compete more)

[jkrdevil]

For the DH, I like the American League rules. The more strategy argument is garbage. It doesn't add that much more strategy and watching a manger make a double switch isn't exciting or usually controversial. The vast majority of managerial debates involve leaving in or taking a pitcher out, which is arguable tougher in the AL because the lineup doesn't dictate the move. Watching Tony LaRussa go to his book is not exciting. Besides when I'm watching sports I want to see best on best. It is much more exciting to see a pitcher go through an American League because it is tougher. That is what most people want to see. It isn't about offense vs. defense it is about competition, and the DH adds to the in game competition.

I don't understand the fascination with day games outside of old fart being nostalgic. There is a reason why the games were moved to at night, more people will watch the game at night. That would be a great idea if you are commissioner, let's move the games where less people will watch (that was sarcasm). That's not good for baseball. If you want to move the start times to 7, that is fine by me.

As mentioned any by in baseball won't work because baseball is an everyday sport. Teams were complaining this year about the days off and they weren't getting a full week off. Byes work in football because teams are used to getting a week off at some point during the season. Thus when it happens in the post-season it isn't out of the norm. It would be out of the norm for a baseball team, and would hurt not help the good teams.